President Clinton...Get Used to It!

[kadee79]

I have nothing to add other than I think BOTH sides should be represented!

So have at it! As far as I can see/tell by chatting with mostly GOPers here in my area...Hillary has it!

In fact, haven't they really conceded that anyway....cooking up some kind of "reason" to impeach her?

[Tennesseer]

Next thread:  President Gomer Pyle.  Get Used To It.

[tallguy]

President Clinton...Get Used to It!

Didn't we have eight years to get used to that already?  

[verrip1]

I've gotten used to that band of egocentrics who have had the ability to instill enough fear in the populace to get elected President.  This referenced one will add to more egocentrism plus a level of megalomania, paranoia and damned mean-spirited-ness not seen since the Nixon Administration.

So am I supposed to accept it as what goes around, comes around?  Not this kid!

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Oct 23, 2015 12:50:21 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

This referenced one will add to more egocentrism plus a level of megalomania, paranoia and damned mean-spirited-ness not seen since the Nixon Administration.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 23, 2015 20:12:20 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Oct 23, 2015 12:50:21 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

This referenced one will add to more egocentrism plus a level of megalomania, paranoia and damned mean-spirited-ness not seen since the Nixon Administration.

nixon = clinton?  that is amazing, bro.

[dondub]

Well Obama was Hitler so no surprise there.

[Tennesseer]

Oct 23, 2015 20:12:20 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Oct 23, 2015 12:50:21 GMT -5 verrip1 said:

This referenced one will add to more egocentrism plus a level of megalomania, paranoia and damned mean-spirited-ness not seen since the Nixon Administration.

Snopes: Zeif-geist

[Gardening Grandma]

Exactly what "unethical" behavior are you accusing her of in Watergate?

She had a minor role in the impeachment inquiry panel.  The story that she was fired for unethical behavior is thoroughly debunked by snopes...

www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/zeifman.asp

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

The Woman Who Once Made Hillary Clinton Cry Assesses the 'Driven' Candidate Now

"She's smiling more," Young said. "She seems softer. She seems more approachable … I'd like her to be my friend, whereas before I couldn't have cared less."

But Young says Clinton is not without her flaws.

"She's a true megalomaniac. Power hungry. To put up with her husband's infidelities? She knew what she wanted, and she went after it," Young told Politico, referencing Bill Clinton's infamous affair with Monica Lewinsky.

"Put yourself in her place. To have a husband who did what he did? … I'd run. I'd run for the hills. And she stayed. She stayed with him. Because I think she had an agenda. She wanted to be president."

[Tennesseer]

Oct 24, 2015 11:57:59 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

The Woman Who Once Made Hillary Clinton Cry Assesses the 'Driven' Candidate Now

"She's smiling more," Young said. "She seems softer. She seems more approachable … I'd like her to be my friend, whereas before I couldn't have cared less."

But Young says Clinton is not without her flaws.

"She's a true megalomaniac. Power hungry. To put up with her husband's infidelities? She knew what she wanted, and she went after it," Young told Politico, referencing Bill Clinton's infamous affair with Monica Lewinsky.

"Put yourself in her place. To have a husband who did what he did? … I'd run. I'd run for the hills. And she stayed. She stayed with him. Because I think she had an agenda. She wanted to be president."

Yet you posted the meme without any comment.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Not true. I posted it along with a comment that I agreed with, that came from a post that dj liked....

[djAdvocate]

Oct 24, 2015 18:15:53 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sure she is power hungry.

I don't know a candidate for president who isn't, though many/ most would deny it.

You don't run for that office unless you think that you are superbly capable, and unless you crave the power and the position.

shaping the world in your image is a rare privilege.  not many get to do it.

[Gardening Grandma]

Oct 24, 2015 11:57:59 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

The Woman Who Once Made Hillary Clinton Cry Assesses the 'Driven' Candidate Now

"She's smiling more," Young said. "She seems softer. She seems more approachable … I'd like her to be my friend, whereas before I couldn't have cared less."

But Young says Clinton is not without her flaws.

"She's a true megalomaniac. Power hungry. To put up with her husband's infidelities? She knew what she wanted, and she went after it," Young told Politico, referencing Bill Clinton's infamous affair with Monica Lewinsky.

"Put yourself in her place. To have a husband who did what he did? … I'd run. I'd run for the hills. And she stayed. She stayed with him. Because I think she had an agenda. She wanted to be president."

1) A woman's actions in dealing with her spouse's infidelities is HER business (and vice versa) - no one else's.
2) She broke no law when she had a private server.   The "email scandal"  is just replacing the "Benghazi scandal".  

Why is she running?  Why does anyone run?  Why is it wrong for a woman to have the drive and ego to run but it's OK for men?  Personally I'm glad there are people out there who do want the job.  Wish more would run - on both sides.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 24, 2015 18:46:30 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Oct 24, 2015 18:44:11 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

shaping the world in your image is a rare privilege.  not many get to do it.

Well said and, beg pardon, politely so as well.

yes, your KINDLY, AVUNCULAR, BENEVOLENT IMAGE.

[djAdvocate]

Oct 24, 2015 19:10:15 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Oct 24, 2015 11:57:59 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

1) A woman's actions in dealing with her spouse's infidelities is HER business (and vice versa) - no one else's.
2) She broke no law when she had a private server.   The "email scandal"  is just replacing the "Benghazi scandal".  

Why is she running?  Why does anyone run?  Why is it wrong for a woman to have the drive and ego to run but it's OK for men?  Personally I'm glad there are people out there who do want the job.  Wish more would run - on both sides.

gramma- isn't it interesting how all of these issues, which are barely below the surface of US society, bubble up during elections? 

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Oct 24, 2015 19:10:15 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Oct 24, 2015 11:57:59 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

1) A woman's actions in dealing with her spouse's infidelities is HER business (and vice versa) - no one else's.
2) She broke no law when she had a private server.   The "email scandal"  is just replacing the "Benghazi scandal".  

Why is she running?  Why does anyone run?  Why is it wrong for a woman to have the drive and ego to run but it's OK for men?  Personally I'm glad there are people out there who do want the job.  Wish more would run - on both sides.

I never said that there was anything wrong with a lady being driven - throwing personal and family respect aside is where my issues arise. If she wants to stand by her man while he continues to disrespect her and her family - like you said - that's her choice.  However, you can't run for the most powerful office in North America - and probably the world - and not expect this to become point of contention for voters; that's just being naive.

As far as the emails; it's not that she broke the law, it's that this whole thing got to the point where a hearing was necessary - end of story.‎ If anyone wants to act like it's no big deal, or ask "why does it matter that it went to a hearing?" go for it! But again, if you think this isn't going to be a major point of contention....

And I'm not even going to get into the whole thing about how she was laughing at the court system back in the 80's..

You all are free to vote for whoever you want, and I agree that there needs to be more that want the job on both sides. However, IMO, verrip and Mrs. Young are spot on in their assessment of Mrs. Clinton's personality. 

[weltschmerz]

Oct 24, 2015 19:10:15 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Oct 24, 2015 11:57:59 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I know that whole Hillary being unethical at Watergate was already found to be skewed. It's annoying when something has been thoroughly debunked, yet it's still presented as gospel, eh?‎ 

As far as her staying with, and defending Bill while he plowed almost everything with a heartbeat, plus her email lies she has been caught in recently; I find it interesting what some of her supporters say about her. Funny, because it's almost exactly  what verrip said‎:

1) A woman's actions in dealing with her spouse's infidelities is HER business (and vice versa) - no one else's.
2) She broke no law when she had a private server.   The "email scandal"  is just replacing the "Benghazi scandal".  

Why is she running?  Why does anyone run?  Why is it wrong for a woman to have the drive and ego to run but it's OK for men?  Personally I'm glad there are people out there who do want the job.  Wish more would run - on both sides.

Exactly! For all we know, she's gay and they had an "understanding".

"You do what you need to do, and I'll do what I need to do. Just don't make it public."

None of my business. Or anybody else's.

[Gardening Grandma]

Oct 24, 2015 21:04:41 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Oct 24, 2015 19:10:15 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

1) A woman's actions in dealing with her spouse's infidelities is HER business (and vice versa) - no one else's.
2) She broke no law when she had a private server.   The "email scandal"  is just replacing the "Benghazi scandal".  

Why is she running?  Why does anyone run?  Why is it wrong for a woman to have the drive and ego to run but it's OK for men?  Personally I'm glad there are people out there who do want the job.  Wish more would run - on both sides.

I never said that there was anything wrong with a lady being driven - throwing personal and family respect aside is where my issues arise. If she wants to stand by her man while he continues to disrespect her and her family - like you said - that's her choice.  However, you can't run for the most powerful office in North America - and probably the world - and not expect this to become point of contention for voters; that's just being naive.

As far as the emails; it's not that she broke the law, it's that this whole thing got to the point where a hearing was necessary - end of story.‎ If anyone wants to act like it's no big deal, or ask "why does it matter that it went to a hearing?" go for it! But again, if you think this isn't going to be a major point of contention....

And I'm not even going to get into the whole thing about how she was laughing at the court system back in the 80's..

You all are free to vote for whoever you want, and I agree that there needs to be more that want the job on both sides. However, IMO, verrip and Mrs. Young are spot on in their assessment of Mrs. Clinton's personality. 

Who said a hearing was "necessary"? A Republican controlled House. I'm sure, if she farted, they'd decree a hearing was 'necessary"

[dondub]

Or a smelling.

[billisonboard]

Oct 24, 2015 21:04:41 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

...

As far as the emails; it's not that she broke the law, it's that this whole thing got to the point where a hearing was necessary - end of story.‎ ...

July 25, 2015, 11:31 AM
Clinton camp says Benghazi hearing date set
...

The Democratic presidential candidate is scheduled to speak to the committee October 22, according to a Washington Post report. www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-to-testify-before-house-benghazi-committee/

Had it gotten to that point by July 25th? And why was it the responsibility of a select committee on an attack that took place over two years ago?

[dondub]

I wonder how many of the Benghazoids know the cause of death of Ambassador Stevens and where he was pronounced dead.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Oct 25, 2015 20:06:36 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Oct 24, 2015 21:04:41 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

I never said that there was anything wrong with a lady being driven - throwing personal and family respect aside is where my issues arise. If she wants to stand by her man while he continues to disrespect her and her family - like you said - that's her choice.  However, you can't run for the most powerful office in North America - and probably the world - and not expect this to become point of contention for voters; that's just being naive.

As far as the emails; it's not that she broke the law, it's that this whole thing got to the point where a hearing was necessary - end of story.‎ If anyone wants to act like it's no big deal, or ask "why does it matter that it went to a hearing?" go for it! But again, if you think this isn't going to be a major point of contention....

And I'm not even going to get into the whole thing about how she was laughing at the court system back in the 80's..

You all are free to vote for whoever you want, and I agree that there needs to be more that want the job on both sides. However, IMO, verrip and Mrs. Young are spot on in their assessment of Mrs. Clinton's personality. 

Who said a hearing was "necessary"? A Republican controlled House. I'm sure, if she farted, they'd decree a hearing was 'necessary"

It was necessary because - like Bills said - it came out of a larger issue. She was found to have made misleading comments, and she potentially compromised sensitive information by not understanding the technology she was using. Why she didn't seek help to figure her tech situation out in the first place, and then lied about it off the start of questioning, is again that personality problem I see with her.

[billisonboard]

Oct 26, 2015 0:55:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Oct 25, 2015 20:06:36 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Who said a hearing was "necessary"? A Republican controlled House. I'm sure, if she farted, they'd decree a hearing was 'necessary"

It was necessary because - like Bills said - ...

Not like I said. The email issue was an afterthought to having her testify again.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Oct 26, 2015 7:50:30 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Oct 26, 2015 0:55:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

It was necessary because - like Bills said - ...

Not like I said. The email issue was an afterthought to having her testify again.

Not an afterthought, part of the wider investigation - like you said. From the article you posted...

Though Clinton has previously offered to testify publicly, Committee Chair Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-South Carolina, had been unwilling to call her before the House panel until the State Department released all relevant email documents. Several thousand pages of emails were released by the department earlier this month.

The news of Clinton's appearance before the committee comes just as the Justice Department received a request from an Intelligence Community (IC) official to investigate the former secretary of state's use of a private email address while conducting government business. In a June 29 memo, the inspectors general for the State Department and the IC concluded that "hundreds of potentially classified emails" were sent from Clinton's private account.

Benghazi Select Committee ranking member Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland, came to Clinton's defense Friday after reports of the DOJ investigation request.

"The Benghazi Select Committee has obtained zero evidence that any emails to or from Secretary Clinton were marked as classified at the time they were transmitted, although some have been retroactively classified since then," Cummings said.

So while I can understand why her supporters don't like how this situation makes Hillary look, there is ample evidence to support a hearing in this matter - which is the topic of debate.

[Gardening Grandma]

Some 8 or 9 hearings/ investigations and $20 million taxpayer dollars and nothing has turned up evidence of malfeasance on the part of Secy Clinton.

As Trey Gowdy put it "We got nuthin" [paraphrased]

[djAdvocate]

Oct 26, 2015 8:52:41 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Some 8 or 9 hearings/ investigations and $20 million taxpayer dollars and nothing has turned up evidence of malfeasance on the part of Secy Clinton.

As Trey Gowdy put it "We got nuthin" [paraphrased]

a lot of people think she is dirty, but i am wondering how many people will think, with some justification, that she MUST be sqeaky clean, after this.

[Gardening Grandma]

Oct 26, 2015 0:55:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

Oct 25, 2015 20:06:36 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Who said a hearing was "necessary"? A Republican controlled House. I'm sure, if she farted, they'd decree a hearing was 'necessary"

It was necessary because - like Bills said - it came out of a larger issue. She was found to have made misleading comments, and she potentially compromised sensitive information by not understanding the technology she was using. Why she didn't seek help to figure her tech situation out in the first place, and then lied about it off the start of questioning, is again that personality problem I see with her.

She was found to have made misleading comments,

If you are referring to comments made immediately after the Benghazi attack, it seems to me that she was quoting what intelligence was sending to her.   She was in DC, not on site. I don't have a lot of difficulty understanding that.  The media here gives conflicting information especially during a breaking story.

she potentially compromised sensitive information by not understanding the technology she was using.

WTF is THIS referring to?  "Not understanding technology?".  She was the head of state, not IT.  If you are referring to the use of a private server, it was not against the law (and btw, you do know that Trey Gowdy uses a private server for his gov't business,  don't you?)  And what, exactly do you mean by "Potentially compromising sensitive information"?  I'd really like to know.  And I'd really like to know what "tech problem she was having" ....   
 

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Oct 26, 2015 17:58:07 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Oct 26, 2015 0:55:00 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

It was necessary because - like Bills said - it came out of a larger issue. She was found to have made misleading comments, and she potentially compromised sensitive information by not understanding the technology she was using. Why she didn't seek help to figure her tech situation out in the first place, and then lied about it off the start of questioning, is again that personality problem I see with her.

She was found to have made misleading comments,

If you are referring to comments made immediately after the Benghazi attack, it seems to me that she was quoting what intelligence was sending to her.   She was in DC, not on site. I don't have a lot of difficulty understanding that.  The media here gives conflicting information especially during a breaking story.

she potentially compromised sensitive information by not understanding the technology she was using.

WTF is THIS referring to?  "Not understanding technology?".  She was the head of state, not IT.  If you are referring to the use of a private server, it was not against the law (and btw, you do know that Trey Gowdy uses a private server for his gov't business,  don't you?)  And what, exactly do you mean by "Potentially compromising sensitive information"?  I'd really like to know.  And I'd really like to know what "tech problem she was having" ....   
 

She straight up lied about the attack being about a YouTube video, and the emails prove she lied because she straight up says that it wasn't about the video in them.

I know she's not IT. My point exactly. When your dealing with highly classified material you need to get your shit straight. It was probably something as simple as sending an email from her phone without watching which email account was selected as the send from account. Problem is she could have very easily compromised something very important, especially because her private server was apparently hacked.

This was no laughing matter and thank God nothing was compromised - which the necessary hearings proved.